3 ms·

> Maybe, but live by fitness, die by fitness. Conditions change constantly, changing the selection algorithm. If you look at human history over the long term,

> Maybe, but live by fitness, die by fitness. Conditions change constantly, changing the selection algorithm. If you look at human history over the long term, the role of the state has only expanded over that time. I'm not saying it's the only possibility, merely that it's the most successful we've ever come up with to date. > If the state goes down tomorrow and chaos reigns, would it be reasonable to argue against trying to change the status quo because Mad Max had been selected? Maybe. Ask me again when all states disappear entirely and fail to re-arise.

dropit_sphere 12y ago
>merely that it's the most successful we've ever come up with to date. That is a very good reason to be cautious about throwing something out wholesale. But it is also a good reason to not fear experimentation, because the official story is that it will show the incumbent to he superior. > Maybe. Ask me again when all states disappear entirely and fail to re-arise. Rather than ask a question, I'll make a statement:impersonal emergent forces of the kind we are talking about use a very greedy algorithm, and are very prone to local optima. There is a place for human assistance in finding where they "ought" to be.